Thanks guys. This confirms what I thought. The reason I'm thinking about this is I picked up a used Les Paul and the nut looks poorly cut to me (pic below). So I asked on the Les Paul forum. Of course the comments were all over the place. People generally agreed that (a) it looks like a Gibson factory nut, (b) the slots are way too deep, and (c) I shouldn't replace it. Huh??
As for the slots being too deep, I can say the BOTTOM of the slots are exactly where they should be. The strings just barely clear the first fret, action is great, and it stays in tune fine. My bigger concern was the string spacing seems uneven. It just does not look like a factory nut to me. I have a Tusq nut sitting here all ready to go, but then the Les Paul guys kept telling me not to replace it.
I guess I'll keep playing it as is as make that decision down the road... View attachment 979774
View attachment 979775
That nut would not be acceptable in my shop, its just sloppy looking. However a lot of thing I see on new Gibsons would not be acceptable in my shop. I do use a proportional rule to space the slots - you can do the math but it is tedious. The idea is that after spacing the outside strings to the edge of the board (a player preference) I want equal spaces between the edges of the strings. The nut in the picture is some kind of synthetic, probably case and then cnc'd.
The bottom line, of course, is how it plays - easy to fret, no buzzes, no popping noise when you tune.
Here is a newish lester with a factory nut, certainly better than yours
View attachment 979816
What I am showing in that picture is the finishing that was covering the truss rod nut - that tells me they hadn't bothered to adjust the relief at the factory....
If you are talking about the channel between the end of the f/b and the head plate, many manufacturers do that. You can either put the nut on the flat of the neck or the angled portion, you can either butt the head plate or put it under the nut. Each has advantages, I've tried several combinations and slightly prefer nut on the flat and head plate butted (making a channel). A lot has to do with whether you are going to bind or not and how that should look. Here is the archtop sans nut, the head binding comes up under the nut to meet the neck bindingAmong the many things I
Among the many things I don't get about Gibson.. see how there's a little shelf where the nut meets the headstock overlay? Why on Earth bother doing that? It looks sloppy and takes extra effort. I can't remember when they started doing it, but it's been standard practice on their production line guitars for quite a while now.